710068_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NURTH GARQLINA
Department of Environmental Quaff

Facility Number (p
0 Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 0pliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Struc;Emergency
r valuation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Other p❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: <D t7S0 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ?FI`t Q E h Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Pax Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
U Wean to Finish l
El Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish 9W 6C
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
] Other
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = c = 6 = Longitude: = ° = 6 = f6
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
OFTurkeyPoults
Other
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Number of Str_u
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page l of 3
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued
�I

Facility Number: '1 — �p
Date of Inspection d b
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier: i A to Ora A)
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
I t . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
VYess
[INo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question # ): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as.necessary):
q1) G9 LL r LP, 6100111 UV6L AT LT. [R-Al tw rA Ll.
WirA Sq, LAI ANb SEr')D f0 pWD . o6n�����►P TODAY
Reviewer/InspectorName Phone• Ile) q4 — 3g$
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 6t,

Facility Number: —LIJ
j Date of Inspection I 1
Required Records & Documents
l9. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit UCO Pliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: $ t{ OS Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: 2ENo(-_ - Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: Ep0A� ?ADc'
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: o =] ' F__j « Longitude:
Design
Current
Design Current
Design Curren#
Swine
Capacity
Population
Wet Poultry
Capacity Populaiian
Cattle Capacity Popularion
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
n-La et
❑Dairy Calf
® Feeder to Finish
AE51 O
2_$Zr0
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Farrow to Wean
D_ry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
El Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
Non -Layers
' ❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Turkey Poults
s
Number of structures:
❑ Other
1E1 Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
ElYes
,_,�
L/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
El Yes
,❑1
El NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
El Yes
�L,`J,/No
L/1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: 11 — Date of Inspection g of
. Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
Cl Yes C1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: I
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): ?4„j
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
/
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmentalthEleat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
NA El N E
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
El Yes
,,��,,``No
ldNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
IJ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
CJ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
tj No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN. ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ' ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) C'W S
13. Soiltype(s) 60Ln.S00VZ tJo vL1Z
_
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
El NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination' %❑ Yes
,U,, /No
LXNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Ej'fZo
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�
❑ NA ❑ NE
k?E-c�a-ems x-0 G-cror-) sWApC.
Reviewer/Inspector Name ^ a `I�� Phone• 10 %r1
1 .3 I . .
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: oS
I21'28104 Continued

Facility Number: '7) — &I I Date of Inspection y dJ
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
the appropirate box.
❑ WIJP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑Other
❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections Weather Code
�❑
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
Yes
El.
,
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
LAN
El NA
El NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
El Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0�
El NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ N
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑Yes
No
mJi
NA
ElNE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
IV
El NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
;No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
,�
[2 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
IJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
No
❑ NA
El NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O lagoon Evaluation I
for Visit A Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other
Facility Number Date of Visit:
Permitted 0 %Ce�rdfied 13 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered
Farm Name: __.�l LG_��
Owner Name:..Z& �'�4
-Madmg Address:.,___
111WzW1 I Tune:
❑ Denied Access
EO Not Operational O Below Threshold 1
Date -Last Operar Above Threshold:..
County:...
Phone No: _ ...
Facility Contact: _ Title:.__ .Phonn�e No:
Onsite Representative: . _' _ .. _. Integrator. / �1—/J . W_ . ------
Certified Operator: , , , _ . . ,. _ T , , , , Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
A&
01swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 44 Longitude • 4 66
Discharees & StreamImpacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ONo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 2rNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes JZ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway Yes ❑ No
s Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
— ALI
12112103 Continued

LacilityiNumber: � — ��j Date of Inspection /
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
'0
6. Are_ there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
[IYes Rf No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes VrNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancehmprovement?
❑ Yes ;X No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes JM No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes JgNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes PINo
❑ Excessive Pon ding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type , IV
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes gNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes ONo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes t No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes XNo
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18, Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes O No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes XNO
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ;dNo
Air Quality representative immediately.
mse a *vmps atipm aka>la`5 'A' se' aa=TSMM�as:�Y Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
f
"� �Gt1niF_� ��l�IZ,JG ry _<7`�JF SOm�Os�� �v !%1L�r,IG �i✓ �T•�2GU/q-
�om �lglo3 � 7
.�v5 Be&V 5 /1/f_� o . �E ✓f �7�rJ , .5vy, �i� s ��A.�a4 ,D 170
6,E /00 C eG o .1r.4-1?7-*L"M941DA -1 /1/5,r9
ReviewerAWspector Name
ReviewerAkspector Signature:
Date:
12112103 Continued

`t
acilitp Number: —01 Date of Inspection
Rewired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application JZ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
25: Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/rnspection with on -site representative?
28_ Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NI MES Permitted Facilities
30_ Is the facility covered under a NPDFS Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
3I. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall )j Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
Z Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ONO
Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes .0 No
❑ Yes J( No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes JgNo
[:]Yes ;YNo
Yes OeNo
OYes ❑ No
❑ Yes Rj No
❑ Yes Jf No
Rf Yes ❑ No
jPfYes ❑ No
❑ Yes 9fNo
193 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
15) 61 .��Rr o �7%i9 ✓,� fF ��f•�7 i�G/}iJ�F� w2�N�i� ��
2� 1 ?4 �P 3twoele _5a'e'v�"
y
D r✓-55) - K
off
"Idfitj FQ
1"eom me"vo t4r4�
`/S
f
lv
.12/I2/03 mA-Zi✓ C OPV OF (o C 4Wo ttEO&40r - NA

if
rE
IType of Visit PICompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason far Visit ApRoutine O Complaint O Follow up &Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
13 Permitted 13 Certified D Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
Farm Name: E�dw� �d FAd y #
Owner Name: C dw''" atf E4�19eI7
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: r4h_lAe d
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
z 17 Time: J 3 SD
ro Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
County: Pe 7de,
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator: "'JU'�l�yt/' �td�✓h
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 " Longitude • 9
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine V.;.; Capaci P,o iilation Poult -a aci Po ulation Cattle Ca a rc P.o ulatiun
rGilts
to Feeder ❑ La er r to Finish ❑ Non -La er ❑ Non -Dairy Iwto Wean
w to Feeder ❑ Other
w to Finish Total Design CapaciTotal SSLW
Number of Lagoons Q ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area 10 Spray Field Area III
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Ye's ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I
Freeboard (inches): 7. S n
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: �] — 6 Date of Inspection Z I 4 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
El Yes
❑ No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
❑ No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
19, Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ZNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Commesits refer to 4 question = ' x� - u
( qz #>7 Eaplam an3 YE&inswers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. ; ,
Use drawings of facility to better explain¢situations�(nse additional pages asnecessary)
�. #- e a.
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
�y,.. Ad)rll no-;/r,,;td 6t %7,S;Ac1, 4ere b,a-o( so
we Lei a� Ae
I1 , Pa do r# P s la apt,i/<e ilrAey4,'oo r q f
W e4Aer p,-7 l t? U
Cond,�i'��r beco^'Ne
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name�.�o�; PJ'I� iJ
­7
"` '
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: Z � 0y
OS103101 Continued

Drvrsion of Water Quabty y
- r
v , O,Diiiis!on of Soil and Water Conservation
.otherAgency
Type of Visit WCompliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit eRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
-Permitted 0 Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
��d
FarmName:................................................4 <..................................................
Owner Name:...... l ►�.rd ...r�......�..
QQ Time: q i Printed on: 10/26/2000
Not Operational O Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
County: fE.jl o r
....................................
Phone No: ................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:..................................... Phone No
MailingAddress; ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: A. ....�Ci71f...PY................. .....v...(1 of t�a3�dlin ................
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
I .............................................. Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' ° •C Longitude • 4 «
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish 2-1580.1 JE1 Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder JE1 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number'of Lagoons % ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance inan-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. 11" discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
IdentiFier: ......................................................... .....
Freeboard (inches):
5/00
❑ Yes �gNo
❑ Yes )9 No
❑ Yes 7,19 No
/� h
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes -�dNo
❑ Yes ja No
❑ Yes 0No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number. e Date of Inspection ) Z Printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ONo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ONo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ONo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes jffNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ONo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes -A No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding -XPAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload firyes ❑ No
12. Craptype tie'+-nl !!yhegI, --r-, dealhS
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 5fNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? &Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ONo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes SaN0
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes -I§No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ONo
19, Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) Yes ❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ;P No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ONo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes B; No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes gj No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes 9No
o yi. . . . . . ..... en... were pgted during this:visit: Yot wi#1 i eeeipe Rio: #'ui-ther'
..Corr deuce. a 6a f this visit. ....... I. . . ... . .....
Comments (refer Eo question #): ESiplain'any YES answers and/or anyxecommendations7or any, other comments - a
_UseArawings of:facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as'necessary). M
11,. D v e ra %Gq�iot., otr flg*d 4vet i lable N,-/Vj t. &''t-Aj 4tGu►�/'cG� ph 11elets -
iA�.J04-1" o-rise 2ODD Gore c{'61 93 As lore and rO? lb-%& C
reye C4: Vel �- [1 t
14. TaGi 1 ;47 needs Q t''c#c'6le GGfieS p� er ;.V,q- %ort L-r A was4cPl4h
-fie '01'10,46k 4 -pt�e meeel 4a be kyq ba.sGd on lh;1_
CCnn�i'E�C��
Reviewer/Inspector Name v1O►tG wrt
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ;gNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes t(No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes 8 No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes No
3 L Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes 9fNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes '25 No
Additional Comments and/or ravings:
M. NeeA la kcry--rezeb"ge'O[ eecey-df O'n et weekl Hive
was-�e e►�►ct � s; s . c>r"�0 rye d a�� v Se r.,�qs-�e q n� 1 yyy s � r a1c��ea�
�o(
w :-�ltitt, (�Q� c, 'i G� }`0t'1 �oT 1�a Z c4c' ti/a iavtS.
Use 44e n) 491,4*14 Ovet;lAble 1U,i'fo9c�
r�bej;�,7n
-'LAG w w G ,B ail o 41l e --Tk9 2 i� w
ILI Ac recerofs qs kAv;�cj elves J -Lapp�bq rayY bectcLI
4ve, 6ewl : vl �l';elot sure r'ecoteds Gosr'�'es�o �D ��e�i�i prgc�,'cG�,
l
IUe4e .��� I;mc aGcv�a��.� -�e sa. i a�sc©rn►ti+�nAla-�f'��t s-
5/00

Pete Padgett # 1 Assessed
/I-b8
Subject: Pete Padgett #1 Assessed
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 10:21:57 -0400
From: Dean Hunkele <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC Division of Water Quality -- Wilmington Regional
.To: Rick Shiver <Rick. Shiver@ncmail. net>
CC: Stonewall Mathis <Stonewall, Mathis@ncmail. net>,
Elizabeth McVicker<[e-mail]>,
Brian Wrenn <[e-mail]>
Joe Albiston called this morning to tell me that Pete was assessed $
1,135.36 for his freeboard infraction and failure to notify. We may be
hearing from Pete sometime next week.
Dean Hunkele <Dean. Hunkele0mcmail. net>
Environmental Specialist
r Division of Water Quality
Environment & Natural Resources
i of 1 07/05/2000 8:57 AM

Facility Number 1 Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 11: 3O 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted otCertified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered [3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
# n /1
FarmName: ...... ....tA.i-:..... m[ ---------------�............`............................................. County .........--`Pnp�LY.........-......................4iP...-........
Owner Name:..... t!.................................. ..... �W. r�l�Il"LT..............................------.......... Phone No: ......-��Tl..... �8-2�:..w �...................................
4tin! m........................ Title: ........... A .. >°li.... Phone No:
q/0 7•
Facility Contact: .....ad........ %� . - ...a85i -.s '....�i ..
MailingAddress: .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: ...1oc� n:t..K.)r�. .. Integrator:....... 3&e... .. ............................................... ..........................................................
Certified Operator: ....... lvdy ................................ to �/IA-r........................... Operator Certification Number:..... 795.,3.._ ..
Location of Farm:
Jk
...........................................................................................-.......---------................................................................----....................---...........--------............................................... r
Latitude 0 & & Longitude • ° 6.
" - : Design Current Design • Curren Design Design Current
Swine rC` Cattle
p_Capacity Population,
° ` ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Weeder to Finish Z 5kp 10 Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean - -
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
s ❑Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
-❑
Gilts,
[I Boars' Tota1,,SSLW
Number o#Lagoons © ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System _
-.
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Dues discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ........ �.$:.-r..
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
6. Are there•struCtures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
[-]No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No�
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
C) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Re aired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18_ Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0: Rio vi. atigris:oe ddjciencies •were h.oted• OiWi ig this'visit'. • :Y:oo will receive Rio furthoe
:-:•correspon�eirce.a�aut.thi.5visit�• �.� ..•.•.•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•.•:•:•.•:•:•:•.•.•.•:•.•:•:•:
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
- - ...
.to
(refer to.question #) EzbWn any. YEs answers and/or.any recomutendations orany oti►er comments.-
Use drawings offato better explain sikuattoiis (use;addiftonal pages as necessary) "
_ _ —
�44sPr aPPI�Ca felt Kra an rri. /14reA )9> 2d[Yi off e.i in - ,1AA' �� i+DtnSeg. �e 5(ray
Q1C4AVi jigs h"n dent ova l* la�nft* �;dc� x fir' 4v wpwfl;.tt. Pc,UC 614Ys i"t+ r Seri i5
�µtrttl�i' 4t iDI�K���I 1W� r► �.'� D'� YA.r.tA�� KY �i1��S �L► l•
G S on �A�lf Or+ W+rL I CTlv�nKS
,rid-t .�,1{d bGSid.� 4rr��ht.t5 CSI••r�.�;el.�} wa 4`�"l �
j•{�ays � PrN} sf '►•t..4�"� o /r� r�>e.�k
��Ave4i/� t�Or� +tlt�S Atr.t 164'
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu a.. �j��I���'/l�nn Dater J 7
3/23/99

Revised January 22, 1999
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number - Operation is flagged for a wettable
Farm Name: C� acre determination due to failure of
On -Site Representative: Part H eligibility item(s) -F1 F2 F3 F4
Inspector/Reviewer's Name: 'rack _ operation not required to secure WA
determination at this time Wmed on
Date of site visit: Yzyq 9 - exemption El E2 . E3 E4
Date of most recent WUP: 3 Annual farm PAN deficit: pounds
Irrigation System(s) - circle #: hard -hose traveler 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
4. stationary sprinkler system w/permanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system w/portable pipe;
6. stationary gun system w/permanent pipe; 7, stationary gun system w/portable pipe
PART I. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part II, overrides Part I exemption.)
E1 Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres, is complete
and signed by an I or PE.
E2 Adequate D, and D�D3 irrigation operating parameter sheets, including map
depicting wettable acres, is complete and signed by an I or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
wettable acres, is complete and signed by a WUP.
V-""E4 75% rule exemption as verified in Part III. (NOTE: 75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fail the eligibility checklist in Part 11. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part 11 - F1 F2 F3, before completing computational table in Part III).
PART -11. 75% Rule Eligibility Checkiist and Documentation of WA Determination
Requirements. WA Determination required because operation fails one of the eligibility
requirements listed below:
F1 Lack of acreage which resulted in over application of wastewater (PAN) on spray
field(s) according to farm's last two years of irrigation records.
F2 Unclear, illegible, or lack of information/map.
F3 Obvious field limitations (numerous ditches; failure to deduct required
buffer/setback acreage; or 25% of total acreage identified in CAWMP includes
small, irregularly shaped fields - fields less than 5 acres for travelers or less than
2 acres for stationary sprinklers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP credits fleid(s)'s acreage in excess
of 75% of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part Ill.
Facility Number �26"r

Revised January 22, 1999 .
Part III. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination
TRACT
NUMBER
FIELD
NUMBER'S
TYPE OF
IRSYISTEMNACRES
TOTAL
CAWMP=FICOMMENTS'
ACRES
161.3
I'a e)
6
'7 71
ra;
'20
FIELD NUMBER' - hvrfrant_ n1111_ 7011P or noint numbers may he used in Dlane of fi;alri ncimhPrs
riPnPndinn nn C.AWMP
and type of irrigation system. If pulls, etc. cross more than one field, inspector/reviewer will have to combine fields to
calculate 75% field by field determination for exemption if possible; otherwise operation will be subject to WA
determination.
FIELD NUMBER - must be clearly delineated on map.
COMMENTS3 - back-up fields with CAWMP acreage exceeding 75% of its total acres acL� having received less than 50%
of its annual PAN as documented in the farm's previous two years' (1997 & 1998) of irrigation records, cannot serve as the
sole basis for requiring a WA Determination. Back-up fields must be noted in the comment section and must be accessible
by irrigation system.

Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection rj:5i7 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted IVCertified [3 Conditionally Certified © Registered O Not O erational Date Last Operated:
//� 1 } p ....................
Farm Name: ..............l�r�l/�LkK ....... pia,1%,p,7v�l.... ........................ ......................... ........ ... County: .... Ww)v..........................---................................
Owner Name:-C.v..wa.Y ........ L., �....... C3 Cl ............. .. Phone No:..... t1.113�...%.. 5:.'!.�.................................
.....
............................... ......
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title:................... . Phone No:
Nailing Address:....... I>o...... P.7S........ 418
`........{......................................................... ........ WA.1.�T1�..Lt.....{�%.0 ............................... ... .�4h.6a.....
Onsite Representative 1+k .......wli_.......................................................... Integrator:.....:........ Y.N. ........................................
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
.... Operator Certification Number:.......
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude �° Longitude • 6 4.
Number of Lagoons= ❑ s Present Subsurface Drain❑Lagoon Area
_Holdxng:Ponds / Solid.Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Dees discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Spray Field Area
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ............11................. .............
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc-)
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes
Q�No
❑ Yes
RI No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
P No
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ Yes
P No
Structure 6
❑ Yes IgNo
Continued on back
3/23/99

M1
Facili y Number: "1 �n� Date of Inspection $ 3
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenaricelimprovement?
❑ Yes
ONo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
(gNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ E` xcessive Ponding ❑ PAN
El Yes
® No
12. Crop type f a�rn J � wlnLe/ sca h Uh"
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
MrNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Wo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
FWNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
RNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
F] No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
10 No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
0 No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
® Yes
❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
0 Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
M No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
lj
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
No
0: iq •Yip#afiaris :or• deficiencies •mere ppted• diking phis. visit. Yoik wi#1 i eeeiye Yio: fui-thgr
Correspondence. AOUt. this .visit_ * - . • -
d _ -
Codiments (refer to, question #) Explainany YES answers and/or any: recominendsfions orany otlaier comments
Llse dirawings of ;facility Wbetterezplatn,situations (use addid.& l�pages as necessary) r
T Leganr, a(1(, 04� S Sko tt �e "Lae 1.
� • k 3b-&e 3ht7U)�vv� +t-R_ 5r.!l� , u1WS &, `fL t' dJs sko,)Il be 11, t i`t CGrr�s.
iq. %,1.4- Sc� I y +seeu�da�e� lLqF- �avtt� tre cr�dS.
5p.1 t e si5 Ou,t- i llt^e0 U nitVPl�y . G.1D aC� GWva�us �s S v c (1
Reviewer/Inspector Name P = ,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,
Date:
A6
3123199

r Facility Number: �� — (o�� Date of Inspection �r
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
T
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
1P No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
0 No
AAditional Commentsan or rayvings ,
3/23/99 A

of' .Soil and Wafer Conservatiori =Operation Review
T r 3
Division of -Soil and Water Conservation - CornplianceTnspectron
'JADivisibn
of Water Quality-- CompG-n Inspection
Other`Agency -.Operation_ Review
10 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-u of DSWC review IkOther
Facility Number -I (t8 Date of inspection g 4
Time of Inspection = 3p 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted ( Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered JE3 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:.............. ................�il4 t'' ........... Coantv:...... G1�t>r
f.....x+,.........1........................................................-................................----...................I............
Owner Name:... 6;cox:�......fe:.-? l...........-�4dyI.................................................. Phone No:.....O.w0. .-.. {3......... ..............
Facility Contact: ................. .. ......g......... ... Title:..........
....................................................... Ph
pone No:................................---
�lailinb Address: ......p ....�?C.......4 �..................r.............�.......r.................I.............. .......!4�.����.�.......jt.�................................... . gala.........
Onsite Representative :...........tiuy...5.?W►�......1rUIM�ftA...fkY.�C ... Intedirator:`V.y................................................................
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................. . .......... . ................. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
........................d.n....�o.f............2. .�.......p.....-..-... ..�.�.)... o ......t�►1.t ...... xs........ c........... .... 13Q.........................................................................
t................................................................................................................................... .......... -
Latitude Or0�0.r Longitude��—
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish JEI Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity Z t)
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons l ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impact
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field [-]Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
h. If discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. if discharge is observed. what is the estimated flo%v in ealhnin"
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 structure 5
ldentif icr:
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[M Yes ❑ No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): ........... (I.........
1/6I99 Continued on back

li4acility Number: '11 —4t 1Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement'?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
1 I . Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
12. Crop type.................................................................................................................................................................
y R
❑ Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application'? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement'?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required .Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
0: N>D.vio ations:ot def ciencies .were notr~d during .this;visit:. You wvi11'receive nff further . ;
•;•Corr-esporidei�ce;a;boitt;this ;.;.;.;:;.:.;.;.;.:.;.;.;.:.;.:.:.:.;.;.;.;.:.;.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any -recommendations or any__otlier comments ,-"
Use drawing§ of facility -to better explain situations. (use additional pages -as necessary):
[&YOM LI-W i MVw A_ be.. LowertJ M o1 r t,' POAs; b L
L,&Sce tl vv%&, l t - % j,o u1 fie— V e ir► {7' 4 c1 r c�c cv,�c, c• y % tle lr� c t a f a: • G��{c r s�tcnl�c� b e
sew 3- WJ M vt�lar, b i v; 4 OK of U)� �� G�f ifi{ t. a lo�
COt►n �i�: C+v�L�t� w1 i •. A-wboo-v) rev n v�t�n
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
1 /6/99

13 Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
Routine O Cum Taint 0 Follow-up of DW ins ertion 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection rU 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[] Registered Kcertified © Applied for Permit © Permitted [3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: c.� ��rW hG��6-q... ... .. Countv:.........Fe 1 . c............................................
.............. ... �.............
Owner Name: ..................'.................. ..............................................................
6 Phone No: ........ 5ro.:..4s— 8�13
............................
Facility Contact: Title: ...... Phone No:
MailingAddress: -.-••. .... :.....9 0_X... . �................................................................................................................................................. ..........................
7
Onsite Representative:...... 11wF ��.......G���............................................... Integrator:......-. ` .'� K— F-r-..r`"`5.q......._..........................
Certified Operator: ............. �.�1.4t � ..... G'��G............................................... Operator Certification Number;......1.(..q.�..2.�...............
Location of Farm:
rllX^....�h:LV.....1.(.�. f4lq...%LtxY... r�. "�.� ....9: nile...... Z:..%'.t...� .Lc...fGrM:...dn....! ..1!d1.4�1...r�i 4'...8.....................................I
....... ....
-.....r(......^'.,2 r.:(x.....s��'.......'L................................................................................................................................................
Latitude �• �' 0" Longitude ' ' 0"
Design; = Current Design_.; Current Design.' ' Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity ,`Population. Cattle Capacity Popu[latioq
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑Dairy ,
Feeder to Finish s$ a F❑ Non -Layer I❑Nan-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other.
❑ barrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts s
❑ Boars, r Total SSLW
Number of Lagoon / Hoidrng Ponds , ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ rea Spray Field A
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System. ,
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? (Yes ❑ No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the convevance man-made? ❑ Yes ONo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes Iro
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes O(No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes �(No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes �!(No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes iNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes KNo
7/25/97

Facility Number:
r
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes PfNo
Structures (Lap-oons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): ......... Z......................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type C o r rl ........ Lek .`......
�''.r...........
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18, Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
0- No.vitiiations•or deficiencies:were notedduring this:visiC- Voidwiii receive -no -further.
correspofid6kcc d out this:visit:• : • .
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes ONo
kdYes ❑ No
❑ Yes bNo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes VNo
dyes ❑ No
❑ Yes [(No
❑ Yes VfNo
❑ Yes QfNo
❑ Yes �fNo
❑ Yes KNo
9Yes O(No
❑ Yes KNO
1 • � w;;.jj��•'r,2 �v-j a✓ d re,�c nec ✓ c �l � h �� [f� � � . {} 12t ve5 e44A l/Lsl2-r
P9vat, / 6*ie GI rcCt 0;1 p o� 1 G-5Oc1 Vi f.�.Cf/r t e,Lt It.
Cot-,- G'7r00 v44C , tv&, )( F k
f) r r,- s4&,61;34e✓
, :��d(, 1�eco+v�M vla�` �prc•/'n� rK At1�ti�a 1 LaL� c��f r5 e
7125/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 7-1
if

Site
Facility No. 9--
DIVISION OF ENVIR0NlyffitiiAl.LA1�iA GE11E�i~I
P �tZ'vl_-kL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS S= VISITATION RECORD
DP.TE: l/- 2 / , 1995
Tirne: //• Zd .I-
F`• ems: Name/Owner. C-_- ._ PLC 6-Q-4 e
Address: f3 2l 4 _7V
Con. - N �-
i for --j A- V, � w n� _ Phone:
On Si.e Reoresenmdve: t. PA4455 04 yf _ Phone:
Pnvs c l Address(Loc don: 1 1�
Typt of Operation: Swine Pat3 3 Car -:le
J ,1
Desig= CapacitymF. : _ (� �c�L? �SSvp Nuber of on Site: 2 e
DE'-.Yz Ct7dification Number: ACE DIM Ce,�;ica-onNumber: ACNMW
Lar.�de �1 � Lonzlrude: �� 9 ' !' 7 E'.eva on: Fae:
Ciicle Yes or No
Does are Ai-iimal tiiiaste Lasoon have sufficient=tf.-oard of I Foot - 25 yea_ 2A hou_- stoam even;
(ar_-c, d�,ateiy 1 Foot . i incites) `; or No Acnia Freeboard: 2 R. Inc:les
�t v seeoaae oose= red from the la�:.00n(s ,? Yes o 'v as ar:v erosion oose:ved? Yes a:
Is _'21-_:er _te lane ava Fi le for 5:7raV? z a= �0 I� s=!e C()%,er C.jviD aC,F-7 3�:i? C�oi NO
Dees :._e facility mee_ SCS mo'mmurn se:hack c _e___% %00 Fee_ H. Dwelli�as or No
100 Feet ilom'r 4ds7 f or No
Is w:i al waste stodmi!ed wiihLn 100 Feet of"USGS Blue Line Sue=? Yes or i o
Is .1 waste lay:d applied or snrav i:s:ga.cv w�:�- t 2f Feet of a U S G S �Lc B'uL Line? Yes e
waste LischarLTHIM ware s oz .:;e st cT d di.c,. _ s::_ or, o_-:e_
s Ei ar than- ade devices? Yes or'---' L- Yes; Please Fxalal-n.
Does t:`te facility m intain adeauate.wa-sic manaae:nentrecords (vola�'�es of L `n1r-e. 12--nd auuiae-1,
sv.,:v irzigated on specific acreage witn cover c.aa)? ass•6r No -
r-
Addit::onal Cornnents: 6) �, ivy. � f,2lc�° c ro S 5
vY1s , r , ' L
1 e l
' for Nam
~�lciiity Assessment Unit
c
l�

t.1

I)tte tcequire:�--
F3ciliry No. _%
DIVISION OF ENVTRONVMti`I'AL MAriNAGE--MENT
A _,N`LMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS STFE VISITATION RECORD
DATE- - _ /1 z /- _, 1995
Time: 14, 04 +
s'
Farm Name,'Owne. Ve G - PA A e
Mailing Address: Yn-BOX 47j _ UA (kLj<_ AZe, Z jj6&&
Counry : ft1
Irate ator. �-, k _ - - - _ Phone:
On Site Representative: &A�L_ ?4.41% , Phone:
Physical Address/Locadon: - J�g2q -Y% r I, - w, ces-i e/ Se--13 09 _
W; 1
Type of Operation: Swine ly Poulr� Cattle
Deslg Capacity: L8, -Number of Animals on Site- 2y O
DELI Cerdncation Number. ACE DEM'Cerrif-icadon dumber: ACNEW
Latitude: . 141 ' $ " Longitude: 71 " U I- " Elevation: Fee:
Circle Yes or No
Does tine Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient iietboard of 1 Foot _ 25 year 24 hour storm event
(app.o=. ately 1 Foot 7 inches) 0 or No Actual Freeboard: 0 Ft. (0 Inches
Was any seepage observed from the laaoon(s)? Yes g as a_nv erosion observed? Yes or<15-9
Is adeouate land available for sprav? or No Is the cover crop adecuate? CDor No
C*ou(s) being utilized: -
Does t-he facility met: SCS minimum setback- criteria? 200 Fee: from Dwellings' or No
100 Feet from Wells? or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Fee: of _ SGS Blue -Line Sire=? Yes or i c
Is an. m 1.1 waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a L S GS Man Blue Line? Yes o:
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system. or other
similar maze -made devices? Yes ort9 If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adeauate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied.
spray irrigated on spec acreage with cover crop)? tQr No
Additional Comments: d 5� .�.(- -ter • �v� e_ _ !Seek � a c- ro !�
0
VVW
FA
...
Y
In*r Nam a tue
cc: Fsciiisv Ass:' srntnt Unit Use _ aaciimt:its if Nee {ed_

0